p 



Conservation Resources 
Lig-Free® Type I 
Ph 8.5, Buffered 



: 215 
.P55 

copv i ^ 




*2^ ^*. ^^5 . --^ /©0 / ^-€^£t^- 



Conservatism and Progress in 
the Cotton Belt. 



By ULRICH BONNELL PHILLIPS, Ph. D., 

Instructor in History in the University of Wisconsin. 



Reprint from The South Atlantic Quarterly, January, 1904. 



\ \ ~ 



fS'^ 



Digitized by the Internet Archive 
in 2011 with funding from 
The Library of Congress 



http://www.archive.org/details/conservatismprogOOphil 



Conservatism and Progress in the Cotton Belt 

By Ulrich Bonnell Phillips, Ph. D., 

Instructor in History in the University of Wisconsin 

By taking thought, a man cannot add a cubit to his stature; 
and yet he may add materially to his equipment and "value as a 
member of society; he may increase his own and his neighbor's 
resources. By taking thought, a people may adopt broad policies 
which will better its own internal condition and at the same 
time increase its beneficial influence upon the world at large. The 
men of the South have been men of action and seldom philoso- 
phers. They have done what their hands have found to do, and 
have usually done it well; yet it appears that their work has too 
often been each day for that day alone, too regardless of the 
yesterday and the morrow. They have had respect for the his- 
tory of the South, but a too distant respect, which has dealt in 
traditions and oratory and not with the prosaic study of 
economic and social evolutions. Their study ol history was 
more of the antiquarian than of the practical sort. The leaders 
of the Old South were fond of ancient and mediaeval history, and 
of the biblical justification of slavery, but they sometimes failed 
to comprehend the underlying causes of the movements in which 
they themselves were participants. In spite of their general 
conservatism, their lack of this knowledge caused them sometimes 
to be erratic in policy. The South has sometimes followed 
policies because they were traditional or because there was a 
wide-spread superficial feeling that they were right and best, and 
naturally the South has at times gone wrong. A safeguard 
against error, weakened ot course by our human limitations, lies 
in the study of present and future problems in the light of the 
past, and in the comparison of the vie ws reached by truth-seeking 
investigators. The present article claims attention merely as one 
of the efforts in interpretation which may aid future thinkers in 
gaining a fuller knowledge and a more perfect understanding of 
the general problem. 

Within the last half century the South has gone through a 
series of political, social, and industrial upheavals and readjust- 



[4] 

ments; and yet the South of today is the historical product of the 
South of old, with much the same conditions and problems. 
Progress for the future is conditioned upon the developments of 
the past and the circumstances of the present; and future advance 
can be made steady and successful only through correct under- 
standing of the past and sound reasoning upon it. 

Conservatism and progress are not essentially antagonistic. 
Conservatism need not be of the Bourbon type, never learning 
and never forgetting; the spirit of progress need not be exagger- 
ated into radicalism. The conservatism of the South has in many 
things been of a distinctly liberal sort. In promoting sentiment 
leading to the Declaration of Independence, the formation of the 
union, and the declaration of war in 1812, men of the South were 
among the most progressive and powerful leaders. The states- 
men of the South, of both the critical and constructive types, have 
been as a rule far from retrogressive, except in certain instances 
where slavery was concerned; and the South practically controlled 
the United States government throughout the first half of 
the nineteenth century. The frontiersmen of the South accomp- 
lished the conquest of the trans- Alleghany wilderness, opened the 
southwest for cotton production, and by offering a market for 
food products, called the northwest into being. The State of 
Georgia set a mighty precedent in educational lines when in 1785 
it chartered the University of Georgia as the crown of its school 
system and the first State university in America; and the Caro- 
linas, Virginia, Tennessee, and the States of the southwest rapidly 
followed the example. The South for years led New England and 
the Middle States in railway development (a forgotten fact but 
true); and its strenuous efforts for the development of manufac- 
tures were defeated only by the institution of slavery and the 
superior attractiveness of cotton production. In economic lines, 
the mightiest work accomplished by the Old South was the 
establishment of the great plantation system throughout the 
staple producing region as a highly organized institution for the 
most efficient use of ignorant and slothful labor. The Old South 
developed no very great institutions of learning as such; but the 
whole system of life was organized for educating the negroes out 
of barbarism into civilization and for training the j'outh of the 
dominant race to attain the highest type of true manhood and 
womanhood yet developed in America. 



[5] 

In all of the these matters the governing class in the South 
showed strong progressive spirit. But that spirit was hampered 
and its work partly vitiated by two great adverse influences— the 
institution of slavery and over-dependence upon the agricultural 
staples. 

Slavery from its very nature put something of a check upon 
freedom of speech. Washington Jefferson, and Patrick Henry were 
great enough to see and bold enough to speak of its actual bad 
features, but they were men of exceptional greatness and boldness. 
Other men from mere prudence avoided any public declaration of 
views which might percolate to the negroes and possibly encour- 
age them to servile insurrection. In the session of the Virginia 
legislature, 1832, many slaveholding members showed wonderful 
frankness in condemning the institution; but that was the last 
great occasion where Southerners gave free expression to ideas 
which might possibly prove a spark in the powder magazine, the 
dangers from which had at that time just been shown by Nat 
Turner's massacre in Southampton county. The rise of the 
abolition agitation in the North during the thirties brought 
death to Southern liberalism. The abolitionists made certain 
false charges against the Southern system. In repelling these 
calumnies the Southern leaders thought it advisable to ignore all 
the bad features of slavery and deny their existence, to praise the 
institution as beneficial to all parties concerned, and to advocate 
its permanent maintenance instead of its gradual disestablishment. 
This change in the Southern attitude was to a large degree invol- 
untary. A man of temper who receives a blow or a stab does not 
calmly look for its justification, but takes the strongest defensive 
position he can find at the moment and strikes back as hard as 
he can. A people is more prone to retaliate than a single person. 
In the absence of effective laws to which it may appeal for protec- 
tion, it often refuses to parley, and proceeds at once to self-defence. 
Whether wisely or not for the long run, the men of the South 
leagued themselves to defeat the instigators of insurrection and 
maintain the institutions of their country. With the motive of 
preserving the lives and the welfare of both white and black, they 
avoided and frowned upon criticisms of slavery. From the 
exigencies of the case as developed by the historical forces internal 
and external, conservative men became Bourbons, no longer open 
to argument upon that subject. 



[6] 

Over-dependence upon the staples led to the over-production of 
tobacco and cotton; it at times ruined the market and brought 
distress, and it prevented the economic independence of the South. 
When the Bourbons arrived at the idea that slavery was right 
and should be perpetuated, the correlative idea was reached that 
cotton was king and could never be dethroned. The severe 
depression of the forties should have shaken faith in the omnipo- 
tence of cotton, but the menta) bondage of the people and the 
revived prosperity of the fifties prevented the learning of the lesson. 
The cataclysm of the sixties should have brought liberalism in 
race relations. Many planters of the old school felt a positive 
relief when the economic burden of slavery was lifted from their 
shoulders, and were disposed to give the most friendly guidance 
to the freedmen. But the radicalism of the republican majority 
at Washington and the carpet-baggars in the the field in the 
South excluded the Southern moderates from control and led to 
the domination of the extremists of the Tillman type when the 
reconstruction governments were overthrown. Out of the ashes 
of war and reconstruction there arose the "Solid South." Its 
people had been the play thing of the fates, and the play was not 
done. The democratic party in national politics had shown 
itself the only friend of Southern interests. The South now swore 
fealty and service to that party in return for its protection. The 
domination of the blacks was rightly thought to be among the 
worst of possible evils; and to avoid that prospect the South 
pledged itself absolutely to the democratic party. But whether 
chosen by the South or forced upon her, that fidelity has proved 
a misfortune in the long run. It has prevented her having due 
influence upon national legislation and administration, and 
what is worse it has proved perhaps a greater check to freedom 
of thought than slavery was. 

Again, in the lower South the extremely high prices of cotton 
in the reconstruction period caused a new and greater dependence 
upon the fleecy staple. The main object of life was apparently 
to raise cotton. Neglect corn and meat, manufacture no 
ploughs or furniture — but buy them — buy every essential thing, 
so as to have more hands for cotton production ; this was the 
practice of the South. Let the agricultural organization degener- 
ate and small farms replace the remarkably efficient plantation 



m 

system, let the soil be worn out, let the people move to Texas 
for fresh lands, let disorder reign and the planters be driven 
to town, leaving the negroes to lapse back toward barbarism- 
let almost anything happen provided all possible cotton is 
produced each year. 
For example, observe the census figures for South Carolina: 

Cotton. Corn. Wheat. 

1860. 353,000 bales, 15,000,000 bushels, 1,285,000 bushels, 
1880. 522,000 bales. 11,700,000 bushels. 962,000 bushels. 

Hay. Sweet Potatoes. 

1860. 87,000 tons, 4,000,000 bushels, 
1880. 2,700 tons. 2,000,000 bushels. 

The population of the cotton belt had increased considerably 
by 1880; but far less corn, wheat, potatoes, meat and manufac- 
tures were produced than in 1860. Most of their food the people 
obtained from the northwest, and all manufactures they bought 
from the North or from Europe, with the prices doubled or trebled 
in either case by the exorbitant protective duties and the disor- 
ganization of commerce. Such a system of living would be 
ruinous to almost any people in any age; but the South had 
practically no choice. She was to all intents compelled to pay 
an enormous war indemnity, and cotton production was the 
only way of paying it. The South was at the mercy of the North, 
and Vae Victis, the North had no mercy. The Southern farmers, 
with capital and system swept away, were living on credit and 
from hand to mouth. It was a struggle for existence, and cotton 
offered the only certain livelihood from year to year. The interest 
upon debts ate up the profits before the crop was gathered, and 
each year brought a repetition of almost the same battle with 
debt and disadvantage. Where existence is the immediate 
problem, rapid progress is out of the question. It was only by 
tremendous efforts in the cotton field that any surplus was 
gained upon which to base plans for future advance. For twenty 
years the South was forced to dispense with all prospect of 
substantial improvement. She was almost absolutely obliged to 
depend upon cotton and upon the democratic party. Her fidelity 
in politics meant retrogression, while her bondage to the staple 
meant no more than stagnation. 

Dependence upon cotton, in fact, meant a little less than stag- 
nation; for step by step the South advanced out of the painful 



[8] 

distress of the later sixties and early seventies. The outer world 
stood in such great need of the staple that the total productive 
power of the cotton belt through two decades could no more 
than meet the demand. But thereafter the increased population 
and the extensive use of commercial fertilizers rapidly increased 
the output; and in consequence the price rapidly declined, until 
in the nineties it reached the level of the cost of production and 
caused all profits in the industry to vanish. 

We have seen that the high prices just after the war were 
the cause of the exclusive attention to cotton. The declining 
prices in the eighties should have directed energy into other lines: 
but the arrival of that result was delayed. Bourbonism had too 
firm a control in industry as well as in politics. At length, how- 
ever, the over-production in the nineties brought widespread 
distress and forced the people to face the prospect of an absolute 
loss each year from cotton raising. Diversification of industry 
was the only possible remedy. Thus in the nineties a partial 
industrial revolution was forced upon the South. Thousands of 
white farmers moved from farms to factories. Thousands of 
negroes were reduced to debt and destitution, but in their lack of 
initiative they have had no recourse but to raise more cotton, 
always more cotton. Their creditors demanded cotton of them 
and advanced them rations only in proportion to their acreage. 
As the price continued to fall, their only means of keeping body 
and soul together was to produce their own supplies or to 
increase the output of cotton, and they found it the easier to 
neglect everything else and raise more cotton. But in recent 
years the abandonment of the cotton field by the whites who 
have gone to the factories, and a succession of bad season's have 
worked together to check the output of the staple and to raise 
the price to the point at which the industry is highly profitable 
again. 

And now arrives the greater need and the greater opportunity 
for concerted action, under capable leaders, for conservative 
progress. There is pressing need of better system and greater 
diversification in the agricultural industry of the South; but 
unless a strong preventive effort is made, the high price of 
cotton will cause a return of the people to their hurtful dependence 
upon the staple. The lesson of the past should be applied for the 



m 

betterment of the future. The adversity in the early nineties 
showed the inefficiency of the small farms and of the system of 
non-resident supervision of negro tenants. The prosperity of 
today is bringing money into the cotton belt to facilitate the 
re-establishment of capitalized production, to enable capable 
managers to organize plantations in an efficient system which 
will work to the common benefit of the negro ploughmen and 
the white planters. The inflow of capital and the prospect of 
heavy returns upon its investment will encourage men of organ- 
izing capacity to leave the towns for the country again and. to 
study the best ways and means in agriculture. Such study must 
result in the investment of more capital than formerly in drainage, 
terracing, and machinery, and in the greater diversification of 
crops. Capable managers will produce cotton at a lessened cost 
and at a greater profit for they will avoid spoiling the market by 
over-production. 

Bourbonism demands the maintenance of the renting and crop- 
ping system, for in sooth that system has existed for a generation 
and the people have meanwhile preserved life and a modicum of 
self respect. Radicalism demands the expulsion of the negroes, 
to rid the country of that whole race and to attempt to make the 
South just like the rest of America. But the policy of conservative 
progress, basing its contentions upon the best features of the Old 
South, urges the preservation of everything which will tend 
toward restoring and maintaining the graciousness and charm 
of the ante-bellum civilization; of everything which will increase 
the efficiency and add to the resources of the New South; and of 
everything also which will work toward the actual uplifting and 
the general betterment of the negro race. It accepts or rejects 
nothing because it is old or new, but because it is good or bad, 
wise or unwise as a means to the great end in view. The policy 
of conservative progress demands that the present generation 
stand upon the shoulders of the ones that have gone before; that 
it take from the past the utmost advantage that it can, and give 
to the future what it has received from the past, with something 
valuable added as its own contribution to progress. 

Slavery was but one element in the system of the Old South. 
After the negroes had once become fitted into a place in civilized 
society, the plantation system could have been maintained with- 



[10] 

out the feature of in voluntary servitude. If the abolition agita- 
tion had never arisen in its violent form to blind the Southerners 
to their own best interests, it is fairly probable that within the 
nineteenth century slavery would have been disestablished in 
some peaceable way in response to the demand of public opinion 
in the South. Laying the question of slavery aside, the presence 
of negroes in very large numbers in the population made some 
system like that of the old plantations essential for the peace and 
prosperity of the two races. And in view of the still greater 
proportion of negroes in the black belts of the South of today it 
appears that a modified form of the old plantation system is 
the best recourse for agricultural progress and racial sympathy 
in the present and the near future. It will draw the best 
element of the Southern whites back into the country, where 
they will afford the negroes a much needed guidance ; it will give 
the negroes a renewed association with the best of the Southern 
people (always the negroes' very best friends) and enable them 
to use their imitative faculties and make further progress in 
acquiring the white man's civilization. 

The extensive revival of the system is of course conditioned 
upon the capability of the planters. If they follow slip-shod 
methods of cultivation, or if they fail to use their resources for 
the production of grain, hay, meat and dairy products, and 
spoil their market by raising too much cotton, the project will 
prove a failure and the South will have profitted little from the 
attempt. But if capable men in large numbers establish them- 
selves as captains of plantation industry, the present wave of 
prosperity can be made a lasting thing, and the South will quickly 
take rank well forward in the industrial world. 

The political outlook is still overcast, but rifts are breaking 
through the clouds. Dominated by the Bourbons, the South has 
long esteemed its political solidity not a hindrance but a positive 
advantage. But men of the South of late have begun to think on 
these things, and regrets are heard that the present generation in 
politics proves unworthy of the generation of the fathers. Em- 
barrassing questions are being asked of the Bourbons as to the 
causes of the decadence of statesmen. A divine discontent is 
working, and results must come in time. The path of progress 
out of the slough of political solidity and mental bondage and 



[11] 

intolerance is visible only a step at a time, but the steps are being 
taken. The movement to disfranchise legally all the negroes but 
the exceptional ones is surely in the right direction, for it tends to 
lessen irritation and to enable the white people to follow their own 
judgments in questions of current politics and restore the South 
to its former national influence. And it is an earnest of greater 
harmony and greater improvement that the moderates are now 
in such control in the country at large that no important out- 
cry has been raised against this invasion of the negro's so-called 
right and equality. When the zealots of the school of Charles 
Sumner and Thad. Stevens shall have subsided in the North, the 
Bourbons must needs lose their control of the South and give way 
to the moderate-liberals of the school of Henry Grady and J. L. 
M. Curry. 

The whole scheme of things entire in the South hangs together. 
Every detail of policy should be regulated upon sound principles 
of conservative progress. Problems of politics, industry, educa 
tion and religion are closely interwoven, and should be treated 
with a view to their complex bearings and not as unrelated 
questions. The fundamental principles underlying progress in 
general apply with special force to the South because of its back- 
ward condition. The States and the people should maintain 
and spread education and encourage freedom and vigor of 
thought. A well trained citizenry with sturdy morals and 
powerful intellects is the greatest treasure which any country can 
have. The South cannot afford to neglect any possible means of 
further developing the strength of her people. She certainly 
cannot afford to be niggardly or even economical in the support 
of her schools and her colleges. 

In the lateness of her start in modern progress, the South has a 
certain advantage in being able to profit by the experience of 
other conntries and sections, and to avoid the blunders which 
they have made. Her people should and will decline to adopt the 
showy and tawdry features of modern America, and they will 
strive for the worthier things. Her leaders should study the eco- 
nomic, political, and social history of the South, and guide the 
South of today to profit both by its former successes and its 
former failures. The leaders and the people must combine thought 
and vim and courage, and work for further substantial conserva- 
tive progress. 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 



014 442 398 7 



